skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
On the contrary - any trial you offer is incorrect.

"People won't know the value of my service if they can't use it!" means that you either aren't doing a good enough job showing them the value of your service up front, or you have an incorrect pricing model.

Let's take Stripe as an example. It is absolutely free for you to create an account, browse the dashboard, read their API documentation, etc etc etc, but they take their cut of every single financial transaction you do on their platform. There's no trial - either you find value in Stripe's services, or you don't.

Notion has a free tier for single user seats because that's their marketing plan. The moment you want to use Notion for what it's built for, team use, you're paying per user - again, there's no trial period there. Same for companies like Atlassian or IFTTT or Zapier or on and on and on.

"You get our full service for X days for free, then you have to start paying" is incorrect for _all_ values of X. Either, "you have to pay to be a user of myproduct.com" or "you can be a free user of myproduct.com but once you get to a level where you're serious about using the product, you have to pay" is the correct strategy.
Just out of curiosity, what coffee-making function would possess somebody enough to connect their coffeemaker to the internet?

My new water heater came with WiFi, and I just cannot understand why my tank needs-do anything more than just heat water..?
I guess there's personal debt and there's company debt. There's a big difference.
Lots of things that are de jure illegal are de facto legal. In many US States, marijuana meets this description.

To claim "marijuana absolutely isn't legalized" is completely incorrect. Something being illegal is more complicated than what the above poster makes it seem, unless a definition of "illegality" is used that's so broad that it's meaningless.
Meanwhile all the clones and copies just keep right on selling in bodegas and everywhere else. If anything they now have a competitive advantage because they're not paying a dime in penalties.

Some of these vapes are even complete units that are "disposable" which means we've gone from "cigarette filters" to "e-waste" littering everywhere: https://hackaday.com/2024/04/25/reverse-engineering-a-fancy-...
This one: https://mushroomcube.com/ there are others now, but this kit has been around for forever. It also scales well.
Balsamic vinegar is likely fake
So, the best case outcome is a less-democratic version of status quo (just like how California unilaterally drives ~all automotive regulations in the country, with nobody else having any input on them, despite every state having the 'freedom' to make their own), and the worst-case is a complete collapse of the common market.

Is that really what you want? It sounds absolutely mad to me. Your ideology is driving you to ask for a monkey's paw.
Absolutely agree.

On Windows the equivalent would be MSVCRT which is sometimes shipped with the OS and sometimes not (depending on the versions involved). Sometimes you even need to worry about the CRT dependency with higher level languages because their “standard librairies” depend on the CRT.

So if you see that being installed with Java or C# or Unity, now you know why.
That sounds like a comment made in bad faith.

What did you Google?
The fraud laws should be updated to cover this
Hey I'm Felix, I have been playing piano for several years now, but I never got the motivation to learn notation properly because it's just very tedious and time consuming to do.

So i decided to build a small, simple game to help me.

With my NoteQuiz i was able to learn the notation very quick and get me started playing some songs from sheetmusic.

If you have any feedback, please let me know!

Felix
Agreed. I saw measurable speed increases when defaulting to ASCII (via macro) and only actually calling the decoder function if the value wasn't < 128.

#define cdpt(s) ((s[0] < 128) ? s[0] : cdpt_func(s))

https://github.com/torstenvl/trex/blob/master/src/trex.c
https://archive.today/ofhZF
Yes. If you don't need all of the service discovery and auto-scaling shenanigans (or are willing to script it yourself), you can gleefully skip Traefik, Docker Swarm, Kubernetes etc. and just use Caddy! It can really do most things and it does them well.
> Besides the main compiler part, the project comes bundled with an interop layer, which allows you to easily call C# code from Rust and vice versa.

I guess the part I am still missing is when you say Rust in this context, it seems like you're essentially referring to "Rust.NET" really, and not Rust. E.g. it makes it easier to call .NET code from Rust _if_ it's using your .NET target, but Rust for other targets, not so much.

(^correct me if I'm wrong here, as the rest of the points made are based on this assumption)

This just seems contradictory to the goals of someone using .NET/Rust interop in the first place. If you're bringing in Rust, it's because you want the raw power of native code, not just the ability to easily write Rust code where you absolutely could've just written in your original .NET language (because ultimately, your compiler target is .NET, not executable code itself).

I can see many layers of abstraction dealing with this issue, but it still makes me wonder why someone wouldn't just compile Rust to a DLL and call that from .NET.

The calls from Rust -> .NET runtime could be useful, however, as I'm pretty sure you can't just load a class library dll in rust and start instantiating things from it. But at the end of the day, I can't see that being possible without loading the .NET runtime in your Rust program, which involves loading all those dependencies, which .NET languages already do very well by themselves so why not just, for example, write a Rust app and a .NET app and use IPC in such a scenario.
Clojure: Managing throughput with virtual threads
As you know that is only one of the potential problems caused by unemployment. Pointing out a concrete, potential life-or-death problem gives more punch than just saying abstractly that there will be problems.

So the boring version: you will be left with the problem of a sudden loss of money as (concurrently) labor power vanes because LLMs don’t go on strike and you have no one to complain to since no one with any power has to care (see: LLMs don’t strike) that unemployed person #5468 today couldn’t pay their mortgage again and/or started on an opioid death-of-despair campaign.
Nicotine DOES cause health issues, most of them are extreme versions of caffeine, and due to the severity should be controlled a little similar to alcohol.
OP provides data on time-to-convert at various timescales. It looks like it's working for them.
I'm not claiming that review bombing doesn't exist, if it didn't Steam wouldn't need systems to counter it. I'm saying that certain companies try to save face by falsely claiming that legitimate negative reviews, sometimes left in mass, are part of a coordinated campaign or stem from illegitimate intent/sources. Often the root cause of mass negative reviews is that the business legitimately prioritized the wrong thing, made some bad/anti-customer decision, or communicated poorly with their community.

In regards to Epic, I'm not sure which game you're referencing. I don't really get the sense that the sentiment has changed and last I saw the Epic Games store still wasn't profitable after 5 years [0]. Anecdotally, the people I know using the Epic Store either do it for Fortnite/Rocket League or just to claim the free games (and some of those people never go back to play them.)

As an aside, I think the Fortnite store may have some dark patterns, but overall Epic actually does a good job of knowing who the customers are and giving them what they want, to great success. (Apologies if I'm not using the correct terms for the Epic stuff, but I just don't use it.)

[0] https://www.ign.com/articles/the-epic-games-store-still-isnt...
So you think it is a ponzi scheme on investors? If they have no product to sell to the US/NATO military then obviously the company is worthless.
That comment is not my best by any means, and I see where you’re coming from, and respect your view. Thanks for bringing it up.

However, language is both subjective and culture dependent (plus, words doesn’t carry tone and sound). If somebody asks the same question the same way in my native language to my face, it’s not only snarky, but it’s rude (and mildly offensive depending on the context).

I don’t think I’m expected to know the all possible cultural styles, and take anything and everything kindly and politely, all day, every day.

Henceforth, I tone matched the comment according to my perception. I might be correct or wrong according some dominant discussion culture here, and people may perceive me the snarkier one according to their cultures. I can’t judge them, but this doesn’t change the fact that the style of question is rude on my side, and I have the right to respond equally (to my perception).

Normally I’m a much softer person and don’t write sharp comments, so that one is an exception.

Lastly I’ll be posting a research tome on caffeine addiction/withdrawal to the person who asked, so you might one to follow that thread too.

Have a nice day :)
I think the opposite. The trial length is simply a proxy for how long it takes the prospect to actually have the meeting to make the decision. By making it 41 days instead of 14, prospects will sign up and then wait 35 days before logging in a second time to -maybe- trial it. I'll get to that later.

That said, any-day trials ain't gonna cut it.

It's not about the number of days, it's that a trial is offered at all.

Software customers these days (especially B2Bs) have an internal list of hurdles that prevent them from signing up at all. Methodically remove each hurdle, and at the end there is nothing left to do but buy, or ghost.

A trial is a hurdle to be jumped.

I would bet that the number of paying customers who actually -trialed the software- is 20%.

Why?

It takes time, effort, resources to set things up in order to trial them. To spend those resources means the purchase already needs to be approved.

TLDR saying that you offer a trial at all, for any length of time, is objection handling, not conversion optimization.

I'd bet you could say you offer a 3 day trial and see zero change to the funnel %s.

The story in the post also doesn't seem to address the problem (lowering TTC):

> paid sign ups also increased, with conversion rate staying steady, but now with no manual work.

Ok, but did TTC (the problem) go down, or up?
RL seems to be in this weird middle ground right now where nobody knows how to make it work all that well but almost everybody at the top levels of ML research agrees it's a vital component of further advances in AI.
Yup I actually worked on this problem and we abandoned it because the downside of missing important patient information was too risky
I think you mean “dependency” and not “addiction.” Addiction is by definition a bad thing:

“Addiction is a neuropsychological disorder characterized by a persistent and intense urge to use a drug or engage in a behaviour that produces natural reward, despite substantial harm and other negative consequences.”

You’re right about nicotine though. It’s the delivery that’s the problem, in addition to the addictive properties which make the harm of the delivery less salient.
Emphasis mine. From:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Addiction?wprov=sfti1#
I’ve been trying to puzzle out the market for this kind of technology.

Making truly private data actually useful while retaining the privacy would of course be incredible and the use cases are obvious. But the people that have big data generally are not interested in privacy at all.

Academic interest in fhe is understandable since it’s fascinating, but why does industry care? Is this just hedging their bets for if/when the future brings stronger data regulation?
The thing that makes me so sad about this: when I steal an answer from StackOverflow I always put a comment linking to where I got the answer. I could pretend that I do this because it's a good software maintenance practice. Truthfully, I only do it because it's the right thing to do. It's about professionalism and integrity.

Laundering human responses via a large language model not only makes it impossible to acknowledge SO contributors: it encourages people to think GPT figured these things out solely because it's simply so darn clever.

It doesn't help that SO's marketing is encouraging developers to not care about integrity or professionalism:

> provide OpenAI users and customers with the accurate and vetted data foundation that AI tools need to quickly find a solution to a problem so that technologists can stay focused on priority tasks.

Hey buddy, you got priority tasks to focus on. Just let the plagiarism robot do its thing.
> you need a new job

Jobs as we know them have only been around for 500 or so years. There have been other ways of living beforehand and I expect we'll be about to figure another way in the near future. The only real argument I see for keeping jobs around even when human labor isn't needed anymore is the protestant moralistic one, and I don't buy that one.
The problem is making the mistake of being born white and male! The best thing I've learned from all of this is that it's literally free to identify as whatever you'd like, whenever you'd like, so if opportunities are being taken from you on the basis of race or gender, you should take advantage of that. No one can deny that you identify as that thing, since identifying as something is the literal exact same thing as being that thing. That's how I became a non-binary black lesbian woman!

Like when they opened up the "Grace Hopper Celebration of Women in Computing" for non-binary and trans people... So men showed up and claimed to be non-binary to get access to something that was available to any other person except them. We need to continue seeing stuff like this until we fully choke out the idea of admittance based on anything other than "Is this person the best for the role?".

https://www.wired.com/story/grace-hopper-celebration-career-...
How to escape Honda's privacy hell
> What I mostly meant was that for people who prefer to use X11, that will probably remain viable for a long time, without any Wayland.

Or, if necessary, with just a tiny bit of Wayland; XWayland rootful mode lets you run a full X stack with Wayland as little more than a shim to the graphics driver. As a worked example, Puppy Linux implemented this: https://github.com/puppylinux-woof-CE/woof-CE/pull/2265
But then, what is a config file if not a representation of a data structure?
> I can't imagine that being unable to search a chat and look at who said what and when is useful

It might be the bright side of a dystopia, but this is actually pretty useful in practice. If you can't reference previous chats, you don't have to spend time doing it. Instead, you rememeber you had a chat about how to do X, and then do X however you like, because there's nothing to say that's not how to do it. When someone asks you a question on chat, you don't have to be sure about the answer, unless they're going to use it right away, because they'll just do whatever they wanted after the chat expires anyway. This is freeing, in the same way that an autoclosing bug tracker is freeing.
CPI is the most commonly cited inflation metric, and it is actually a cost of living metric. We could also use the velocity of money plus money supply stats, but that is very hard to relate to.

Housing might be somewhat more valuable than it used to be, but the extreme valuation swings we've seen in the last 20 years were due to monetary policy and macroeconomic conditions, and not actual demand. Or I should say, demand for housing is always proportional to population. It's not like when people can't afford a house, that demand disappears. It just can't be acted on.
nit: typo in title Kubernates -> Kubernetes
I mean there's the whole issue of quadrupling your storage space... plus you have to iterate twice... plus you'd have to write four bytes for every code point, even if most of the code points only require one byte...
>I do mind the distort reality, "what is it what you're selling?" aspect. I have yet to see a label on one of these pots explain there's a number of Coffea's in there rather than just 1

What was misrepresented? Are they are claiming there is only one plant in the pot?

Maybe it’s just me, but I wouldn’t consider it misleading if I bought a potted plant and it turned out that the seller had actually planted a handful of plants (of the type I bought) in the pot, instead of just one.
It is a worthwhile reminder.

But, source-not-available proprietary systems are just totally hopeless from this point of view, of course an intelligence agency could slip something on. A bored developer at the company could too. Users of this sort of proprietary system have just chosen to have 100% faith for some incomprehensible reason.
I don't think so. The author is acknowledging that there is a very obvious question they need to answer and doesn't want to leave the reader in doubt about whether they will answer it, but wants to finish making a different point first.
It's almost the opposite of reader-hostile.
> I want to be able to use caffeine as a tool.

Same here. All my daily coffee drinker friends say coffee has no effect on them. I drink it ~4-6 times a month (when I'm very busy) and I can feel the effects from one cup almost all day. More than two cups actually is quite uncomfortable.
that is totally dependent on the jurisdictions involved, and modified by the agreement that the user accepts to start the service(s) no?
To play devil's advocate people seem to be quite attracted to self-sabotaging ideologies, as they offer the intoxicating justifications of "not my fault" and "no point in doing work". Hell, the typical "rebellious" things are practically hand-picked to be ineffectual at gaining any even small sort of power and demonize doing so. Just look at the dynamics of being accused of "selling out".
This is my habit as well. If the company is owned by real people (rather than a corporation), then I'll do the courtesy of sending an email or something to explain why I'm no longer going to use their product/service. Either way, though, I just remember not to use that company anymore and get on with my life.

There's no reason for me to spend my time and energy any further on nonsense.
> The thing is, though, it's not a right, it's their belief.

Would you also say you have no right to live in the United States, and it is only your personal belief? If you think it is equally fictional then at least I can't fault your views for their internal consistency.

> They're very welcome to hold their beliefs and take democratic means to achieve their aims, but in a free and peace centred society they should not be allowed to take violent means to pursue their aims.

Are Jews prohibited from taking violent means to pursue their aims while Arabs are permitted? If not, then how do you accept Arab use of violent means to conquer and settle Israel 1,400 years ago?

> Long story short, we can accept their belief in their promised land without accepting it as their right to take it by whatever means necessary.

First, we aren't talking about a promised land being taken, we are talking about at land that was taken away from them and is at best being taken back.

Second, you aren't required to support anyone in any endeavor. You can even be pro-Israel and pro-Zionism and still not think they deserve your financial support. But if you single out Jews as being the only people in the world that are not allowed to have a state and not allowed to live in their native land of thousands of years (especially for the reason "but the Arabs took it away from them, so it isn't theirs anymore"), then you are indeed being antisemitic.
Yeah, I don't have much faith in them at this point. They had a hit that devs loved with StackOverflow jobs, and axed it during the talent crunch, presumably to focus on their core product (Q&A), but possibly also because most companies were struggling to hire and SO jobs likely made it harder for them to hire, and possibly retain staff.

Now talent is plentiful, and Q&A is less relevant than ever, so they're hoping to excite users by bringing back a "fan favourite".

But it's like if your ex dumps you for someone else then tries to get you to take them back when that inevitably doesn't work out. It's not the same.
Automation doesn't replace human work, it just amplifies how much work can be done.

There is -plenty- of work out there that's currently not worth taking that will be suddenly worth it if you can code 100x faster than you can now. It might be for jimbob's landscaping company instead of google, but that hardly matters outside of your ego.
One related article that I found interesting: https://ericnormand.me/guide/clojure-virtual-threads
Pirate Site Owners Must Surrender, Informants Get Five-Figure Reward
Guide to Virtual Threads in Clojure
do you have any data supporting that their success derives from quantifying everything, rather than just being in the right place at the right time?

anecdotally they seem to have had quite a few failures resulting from 'blind measurement'.
I've come to use ChatGPT instead.

The reason is that while using SO you generally reach similar errors and then read answers and try to make sense out of the problem you are having, that's fantastic, but being able to explicitly state your problem and make followup questions on it is even better.

Yesterday I had to engage with a project using Redux. It has been a while since I touched that technology so I went forward and gave a summary of it to ChatGPT asking if I was correct on my assumptions, from there onwards I made a couple more explanations, a couple questions and I was done. I think this ability to further prod with questions is too good of a feature to pass on.
Have you had said addiction, and if so have you tried to quit it?
Of course speed limits don't matter without speed enforcement (either cultural or legal; I noticed the heavy propaganda campaign behind the 30kph limits shown in the video). Areas with heavy pedestrian traffic have 25mph (40kph) speed limits where I live, but people regularly go 30-35 (48-56kph) on them, even when there are traffic calming devices and timed lights.
Is there a reputation of a security difference between Android and iOS? And in what direction does the badness lean?
Jack Dorsey Leaving Bluesky
Does it classify by where they are native? Some of us like to plant only plants that are native to where we are living. For others, at least classify by their potential for invasiveness.

Other attributes: toxicity (when eaten or even touched), deer resistance, allelopathic potential, pollinator friendliness.
Target throws out coffee maker. Threat actor goes through trash. They don't have to break into the building to get it.
Security is always a spectrum between defense and convenience, and my life experience thus far is a lot closer to "manufactures hate me" than it is "someone gonna break into my house, disassemble some electronic, tap into jtag, exfiltrate all the things" so I would much, much, much prefer if it were advertised as an option that folks who do have considerable threat models could just push a safety pin through the magic "blow jtag fuse" hole and the rest of us could monkey with hardware we legitimately should own
what you're describing would be an "IT system". Most of north america uses something like a "TN system"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earthing_system#IT_network
Well, maybe a way to let workers try out better tools and not explode the budget /complexity of the tech stack is to give devs $500 / year to spend on whatever they want. It could be monitors, a new IDE, etc.... This way individuals can try out a new tool and if they really see itts value they could "sell" it to management.
That makes sense. Have your horrid website be parsed by an AI that outputs boring HTML for screen readers.